what ratio manual steering box for handling?

Looking at redoing the front end this winter and i don't think the stock steering box is going to suit my needs. I was looking at the 16:1 box on firm feel with quick ratio idler and pitman arms. I know power steering would be best but a rb a body with headers is a tight enough squeeze as it is. Thanks for your opinions.

Yikes! 16:1 with quick ratio idler and pitman arms on a manual box and wide tires? You sound like Hercules. Are Scheumaker Tri-Y's out of the question? I know they'll allow enough room for PS and quick ratio pitman/idler's; however, I think they're only good for about 500 hp or something.

http://www.engine-swaps.com/Pages/ProductsType/BRB_Headers.html

tri y's are in the plans. It is just a tin headed 440.

would the fast ratio arms on the current box be worth the effort? The current box was new when i bought the car. Kinda on a tight budget and can't really swing a p/s setup right now. Car will be run with 275/35r18 tires up front.

Depends... How do they fit with the exhaust? I have no idea. But the stock manual box is 24:1 so you'll be getting a workout trying to make turns. Parallel parking will be a bare.

I had a factory 16:1 manual box in my 66 Barracuda with a 340. It was a bit tough to park. Once you were moving, it wasn't too bad. But with a big block AND fast ratio arms with those tires? Good luck, unless you are REALLY strong.

Don't try a 24:1 box for handling. You will be disappointed. They are about 4.5 turns lock to lock and just way too slow for a handling car. I tried it.

so 16:1 box would probably be the best out of the possible scenarios? I'm not worried about parking, the car will mainly be used for autox and cruise nights. I've raced it with the current box and 235/60r14 tires without issues but they were both pretty open courses and that is half the tire that will be on it.

Highly recommend biting the bullet on a Borgeson box, it isnt much more than what you already are planning. The manual box will get you way "behind" in the cones.

what do i have to do to the column to go power steering?

Simplest method is getting Bergmanns adapter coupler and your steering shaft will collapse in itself, plus I also have an extra column shaft if you want it. I actually have an entire floor shift column already setup to.

$1200 to do the p/s conversion + the cost of a column. I'm going to have to suffer with manual for awhile. For that kind of money i'll have to research the electric power steering conversion and go rack and pinion.

Guess i'll get the disc/bbp conversion done and see how bad it is. I don't have the budget to ever be a national contender anyway. Nationals cam t cars are insane...

No I agree, those big checkbook guys get all sorts of bent out of shape when I suggest a 275 tire limit rule or class. "Those tires dont look right on my Camaro whaaaa whaaa....." no you just know if everyone was on the same tire you would get spanked.

Can you put the fast ratio power steering pitman arm onto a manual steering box? I never tried, I guess it hadn't occurred to me.

The fast ratio pitman changes a 16:1 box into a 12:1 ratio.

Here's the steering ratios on some modern vehicles to give you something to compare against.
2011 Challengers have a 14.4:1 steering ratio with 2.75 turns lock to lock
2014 Camaros have 16.1:1 ratio with 2.5 turns lock to lock
2015 Mustangs have a 16:1 ratio
1988 Mustangs have 15:1
Neon’s are 16:1.

Tav

Question: Regarding your Challenger and Camaro examples...since the ratio of the Challenger is faster, yet the LTL is slower, doesn't that mean the Challenger is actually turning the wheels at a more extreme angle at lock?

depends on the length of the steering arms at the knuckles, if the Challengers are longer than the Camaro then no.

gotta say if i could make my valiant turn like my scat pack, i'd die a happy man. I was giggled at in grid at nationals but several people came up to me during the event shocked how well that monster handled.

I'm following your post to help me make the best decision for my 64 Belvedere. I agree that 16:1 takes too much arm strength & just talked to Dick at Firm Feel about a 20:1 manual box with the stock pitman arm for my 64 Belvedere & he said it would be a good set up. Still am deciding between a stage 3 power box upgrade or to have them do a 20:1 setup in a manual box I have. Forgot to ask him about the 20:1 box with the fast ration pitman, so will call him tomorrow.

I drove my P/S 68 Barracuda with no pump for quite a while, trying to find a good one. Iron head small block with 255/50-17s. Not the easiest thing to drive, but unless you are spending most of you time in crowded parking lots quite livable. I've got a 20:1 manual box now and I'm curious to see how it drives and what the actual weight is with the Eddie headed B engine.

I have a 16:1 flaming river box in my challenger. It's a beast when trying to turn from parking spot, it's not for everyone that's for sure. It does change lanes at highway speed with little effort and a flick of the wrist.
If I had to do it again, I would look for a 20:1 box, I think that's what the quick ratio was from the factory. The 16:1 box is kinda for the old corvette"like" lightweight car, small block handling car.
I enjoyed the stock 24:1 box I had on a duster once. But I agree it's too much for performance

The quick ratio box from the factory was 16:1. The 20:1 was a DC/Mopar Performance part that you could buy separately to install in your 24:1 box. 16:1 works well for an early A body, although it is a bit tough to park.

I can't imagine the effort was more than my 64 300 when it's power steering pump seized and I drove it for three years without power steering. It had fat meats front and rear too.

So any complains about low speed or parking effort makes me scratch my head especially when you consider the alignment specs for a manual car are different to help make it easier to steer at low speeds, though that's not really applicable in this forum I would hope.